BOWRA. Xenophanes and The Olympic Games

Xenophanes and the Olympic Games
Author(s): C. M. Bowra
Source: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 59, No. 3 (1938), pp. 257-279
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/291578 .
Accessed: 16/02/2014 22:02
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
American Journal of Philology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AMERICAN
JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY
VOL. LIX, 3 WHOLENo. 235
XENOPHANES AND THE OLYMPIC GAMES.

The lines, quoted by Athenaeus, X, 413 f. (fr. 2, Diehl), in
which Xenophanes attacks the rewards given to victors in the
Olympic Games, stand almost alone in the records of Greek
thought about athletics. It is true that Euripides echoes their
sentiments in a famous fragment of his Autolycusl and that
Isocrates begins his Panegyricus2 with a complaint that while
athletes are rewarded, those who have toiled for the public good
are not. But these complaints belong to a later age when ath-
letes were often professional, and in any case both Euripides and
Isocrates may be suspected of repeating what Xenophanes had
said before them. His criticism is all the more impressive be-
cause it provides the opposite side of the picture to the praise of
athletes found in Simonides, Pindar and Bacchylides, and comes
from a time when, we assume, athletic prowess was universally
honoured in Greece. That Xenophanes should counter what
seems to have been a common opinion is naturally taken as
another sign of his independence from accepted beliefs. The
man who attacked Homer and rejected old tales about the gods
might be expected to attack the honoured institution of the
Olympic Games and to say that his own aolt, was more worthy
of reward than was success in any of their various events. It is,
therefore, not surprising to find modern scholars treating these
opinions of Xenophanes as part of his philosophical system and
typical of his outspoken criticism. Recently this view has re-
ceived new strength from W. Jaeger,3 who, though he says that
Xenophanes was " no original thinker," says also that he shows
"the inevitable collision between the old aristocratic upbringing
1 Fr. 282, Nauck. 2 Or. IV, I.
8Paideia, pp. 230-4.
257

258 C. M. BOWRA.
and the new philosophic man," and bases much of his case on
this fragment. His argument contains two main points: first,
that by attacking athletic renown Xenophanes was opposing the
aristocratic tradition which believed in "the absolute supremacy
of the ideal of the games," and secondly, that in its place he
recommended his own lroli?, which Jaeger takes to mean "spir-
itual education" and explains as "the strength of the spirit
which creates right and law, correct order and well-being." If
Jaeger is right in his interpretation, Xenophanes was certainly
no less original in his criticism of institutions than of theology.
But on closer examination doubts suggest themselves, and the
lines seem to have a different meaning and to have been prompted
by other motives.
The lines were probably written before 520 B. C. For in
that year the Race in Armour was introduced into the Olympic
Games,4 and since Xenophanes mentions all the main events
which existed before that date and says nothing about this, we
may presume that it did not exist when he wrote. Xenophanes
was born about 570 B. C., and so the lines may be dated between
550 B. C., when, we may presume, he began to write, and 520
B. C., when the Race in Armour became a regular event. The
date is of some relevance to the problem, since it shows that
this fragment is earlier evidence for Greek views of athletics
than anything in Pindar or Bacchylides and probably earlier
than the few fragments of Simonides' Epinicians. It is at
least possible that the athletic ideal, which dominated the Greek
aristocracies in the fifth century, was not so dominant in the
sixth century, and that Xenophanes was not so revolutionary
in his attack as might seem from a comparison with Pindar.
In any case the lines should first be considered with reference
to the language and ideas of their time, and when that has been
done, their social origin and significance can better be estimated.
Xenophanes says clearly that he regards his own aoflr as
superior to physical strength:
After the first foundation events were added in the following order:
two stade race in 724, long distance race in 720, pentathlon in 708,
horse-race and pankration in 648, wrestling in 632, boxing in 616; the
four-horsed chariot race was probably substituted for the two-horsed
chariot race in 648. Cf. E. N. Gardiner, Athletics of the Ancient World,
p. 35.

XENOPHANES AND THE OLYMPIC GAMES. 259
pa)Urls-yapallelvwv
avSpwv 8t7r7TTWAV
7rUCTovtEp UfOl7r.
aXX' eiKr paXLarovro vo/tTeraL, ov8c IJKaLOV
7rpOKpLELV p/L,r?qV Tr)s ayaOrj acrols (fr. 2, 11-14)
The interpretation of these lines depends on the meaning given

to aofo'. Opinions vary between referring it to the poet's skill
and to his philosophy or wisdom. Either is possible in the sixth
century.5 The first meaning of "craft" or "skill" in any art
or handicraft is as old as the Iliad,6 where it is applied to ship-
building, while Margites is said to be in no way ao4o's because
he lacked every reXvr1.7 Anacreon applied aoorp to embroidery,8
and Attic potters used it of their craft.9 Among other forms
of craft was song, and excellence in this was also aoqot`, so that
it was the word for what we call the poet's "art." Hesiod calls
Linus 7ravTrot`l?aofoti~ and the word is used by
WeSaqKo,ra,10
Solon 11 and "Theognis "'12 for poetry. The same sense is used
at a later date by Simonides 13and abundantly by Pindar. It is,
therefore, perfectly possible that Xenophanes used the word
aofr to mean " art" and that we can accept such translations
as "our art" (J. Burnet) and "the poet's skill" (J. M. Ed-
monds). If so, Xenophanes simply complained that his poetry
was not rewarded as the victories of athletes were. On the other
hand it is also at least possible that Xenophanes used aooitr to
mean "knowledge " with special reference to what he taught,
and so Diels took it when he translated "unsere Weisheit."
That aoft7vcould have such a meaning in the sixth century is
not absolutely certain, since none of the early philosophers or
physicists seem to have used the word in this sense. But with
Heraclitus it came, if it had not already come, to have a mean-
ing like this. The best evidence comes from his attack on
Pythagoras, who e7rovL?aaro&0VTOVaoo't'Lv, 7roXvJaOirv, KaKorexvlr)v,l4
-" claimed as his own a wisdom which was but a learning of
6 Cf. B. Snell, Die Ausdriicke fuir den Begriff des Wissens in der
vorplatonischen Philosophie (Berlin 1924), pp. 1 to 19.
a 0 412.
Fr. 2, Kinkel. 11 Fr. 1, 52, Diehl.

8Fr. 108, Diehl. 12 770, 790, 942, 995.
9 Epigr. 1100, Kaibel. 18 Fr. 56, Diehl.
?0Fr. 193, Rzach. 1 Fr. 17, Bywater (fr. 129, Diels).

260 C. M. BOWRA.
many things and an art of mischief" (Burnet). Since Hera-

clitus is speaking of Pythagoras' laTop[r, which he practised
"beyond all other men," this shows that for him there was a
olr]o in inquiry as in any other reXvrq, although in the case of
Pythagoras he thought the (-ooIq mischievous. So Heraclitus
also uses the neuter adjective aooov to qualify what is appro-
priate to his own special activity, such as listening to the
Word15or knowing the thought by which all things are steered.16
And finally, as a seeker after truth, he said that ao4o' consists,
at least partly, in speaking the truth.'7 The word ao(ol, then,
had for Heraclitus a special meaning, and from this it must
have developed its later sophistic meaning of philosophical or
scientific knowledge, such as we find in Anaxagoras18 or in the
epigram on Thrasymachus,19--- aoo.
8e rTEXvrq In the case of
Heraclitus we can see how the word came to mean what it did
for him. His business, like that of Pythagoras, was iaropLr&,
itself a reXVn,and being proficient in it he claimed for it the
name of arolf.
These two views of the meaning of ao4ld are not absolutely
incompatible, though neither quite covers its full meaning.
ao~(> was proficiency in any e'XVj and Aristotle reflected the
view of an older generation when he said that aoota was apeny
TEXvv).20 It is simply skill in any craft. This helps to fix what
Xenophanes meant by his own aoct-. Since he was writing a
special kind of poetry, it must be to his excellence in this that
he refers, and we are wrong to assume that he meant either
poetry as such or knowledge as such. He meant simply the
philosophical and didactic poetry which he himself wrote and
which he believed to be worthy of better rewards than it got.
Jaeger, then, gives too precise and too philosophical a meaning
to aoft'q when he translates it by "spiritual education." No
doubt Xenophanes regarded himself seriously as a teacher, but
it is not directly to teaching that his words refer. Nor can such
a meaning be extracted from his description of his art as ayaOfj.
He means simply that it is "good" in the same sense as he
calls the boxer "good " in the next line. Each is successful in
15 Fr. 1. 18Fr. 21 b, Diels.

6 Fr. 19 (fr. 41, Diels). 9Athen., X, 454 f.
7 Fr. 107 20Eth. Nic. VI, 7, 1, 1141 a 12.
(fr. 112, Diels).

its own way as an example of TcXVf. " Good " is so ambiguous

a word in English that it is hard not to find some ethical con-
notation in the Greek word ayao's, but it may be doubted
whether it had any such connotation in the sixth century,21and
it is unlikely that, even if it had, it would be found in connec-
tion with such a word as (roi'r. Nor is there any need to alter
r7i aya607s in 14 with J. M. Edmonds to r-yaOevr. Greek poets
seem to have felt little objection to repeating the same word
within the space of a few lines, and 7yadOeosis applied only to
places.
There seems, then, no convincing reason why we should accept
Jaeger's interpretation of cro)t' in this poem or deduce from it
that Xenophanes illustrates the inevitable collision between
philosophers and aristocrats. But it would still be possible to
assume with Jaeger that Xenophanes' attack on the games was
part of an anti-aristocratic outlook, that as a rebel or a misfit
he attacked an institution dear to the established class of nobles.
The question of Xenophanes' social status is of some interest
and needs consideration. The champions of his comparatively
humble origin might claim that his dislike of athletic renown
was part of a revolutionary or democratic or at least of a dis-
satisfied outlook. The basis of such views is the belief that
Xenophanes was a professional rhapsode who earned pay for
reciting poetry and that he shows that fact here. The evidence
for this is the statement of Diogenes Laertius 22 that Xeno-
phanes avtroo5 palo,eiL ra Eavrov. K. Reinhardt accepts this
literally and explains these lines as the complaint of a profes-
sional poet who introduces himself to his audience as someone
more worthy of their money and honours than the athletes whom
they have been watching.23 But, as Burnet pointed out, " noth-
ing is said anywhere about his reciting Homer, and the word
pai?fe)iv is used quite loosely for 'to recite.' "24 Indeed it seems
impossible that a man who made his living as a reciter of Homer
should have been called 'OjLrpo7raTr-rby Timon of Phlius25 or
have said what Xenophanes said about Homer. To judge by
fr. 1, 21-4, he thought it wrong to tell such stories as Homer
21Cf. Snell, op. cit.,
p. 90.
22 24Early Greek Philosophy, p. 127, n. 2.
IX, 18.
28 Parmenides, 25 Fr. 60, Diels.
p. 134.

262 C. M. BOWRA.
told, and after saying that, he would have found it difficult to

recite such passages as the Atlo a7rary or the ?EoluaXta. It is in
fact unlikely that Xenophanes was a rhapsode in the proper
sense of the word or that he endured the feelings of resentment
or inferiority which professional poets may sometimes have suf-
fered. On the contrary Fr. 1 shows that he mixed in good
company as an equal who was allowed to say what he thought
and to dictate his instructions to the other guests in a rich
house. It may, moreover, be doubted whether elegiac verses at
this date were composed by professional poets. There is no evi-
dence that Tyrtaeus or Archilochus or Mimnermus or Solon or
Theognis sang for anything but their own satisfaction, and it
is reasonable to assume that Xenophanes was like them.
It is, of course, perfectly true that Xenophanes complains
that honours and rewards given to athletes would more suitably
be given to him. But this does not mean that he was normally
paid for his services. In fact it implies the contrary: he com-
plains because he is not rewarded. Nor does it even mean that
he would like to receive money for his poetry. What he wants
is not so much money as respect and honour such as are given
to athletes. Money was doubtless one way of rewarding athletes,
but it was not the only way, and for Xenophanes it is simply a
symbol of the honour which he feels to be his due. Nor does it
seem likely that in his time poets were paid for a song as they
were in the fifth century. So far as lyric poets were concerned,
payment seems first to have been made to Simonides,26 and
Pindar certainly regarded such payment as a comparatively
recent institution when, speaking of earlier times than his own,
he said:
a MoZaaiyap ov iLX)OKEpS' 7Trw TOT' ?Jv OV8' epyarns.27
Rhapsodes were certainly in a different position and may well

have derived their living from pay received for recitations, but
there is no evidence that other poets were like them in this
respect. What Xenophanes wants is honour, and we can see
what his conception of the poet's true position was from the
words which Homer makes Odysseus speak to Euryalus in
Phaeacia:
26 Schol. Aristoph. Pax 695.
27 Isthm. II, 6; Cf. Greek Lyric Poetry, p. 387.

aXos e?v y?ap (LOOS aJK8VO'TEpo T7rEXCavv7p,

OE6
aAAa , TEw opqfv Er
-Oy EL ol 8E3T E VT
Tp7ropoLevot XEcvcovclv, o 8' a'(LaXE'o ayopevr1

oio /z EtXtXgH ,uEr&, $\S 7rp '
altoL jU?AXnT, EL'a rperreL aypo, evoutIov'
EpXo',evov 8' ava arv OeO\V
US
ElvopooOv.28
Xenophanes feels that the man of words should be honoured by

his fellow-citizens, and in saying what he does, he advances no
new idea. He wishes rather to return to the old honour in
which a poet was held before athletes superseded him in popu-
larity and renown. He expects, in fact, to receive the kind of
reward that was given to Pindar for his Dithyramb for Athens
when he was presented with the right of 7rpo,evta and a sum
of money which is variously given as 1,00029 and 10,000
drachmae.30
Jaeger's argument, then, is inconclusive about either the
political views or the social position of Xenophanes. But the
argument from his attack on athletic rewards looks stronger.
In the fifth century victory in the Games was highly prized by
the noble families of Greece, and Pindar erected round it a
whole metaphysic of aristocracy, seeing in athletic success the
manifestation in apera of those noble inborn qualities which the
fortunate few inherited from divine ancestors. To a lesser de-
gree his views were shared by Bacchylides who believed strongly
in the importance of success in the games. For these poets
important patronage came from nobles like those of Aegina and
from Thessalian and Sicilian princes. But it is not certain that
in earlier centuries athletic renown was so universally prized by
aristocrats. In Sparta of the seventh century Tyrtaeus was
careful to say that aperT?in running or wrestling was not nearly
so important as aper on the battlefield:
ovr av fJlvraarLfv ovT' ev Ao)y aWvpa

pTL1tr7V
OVTr Troswv apert7s OVTre raXaLtrLoo
vvw%s,
0OT' el KvEKXArTWv/pv CXOL/,yECOs rT /lr/V Te,
VtKwr7 8E Oewv ?priKtov Bope'rv.31
and he justified his preference by the usefulness of good fighters

to the city. It is true that Sparta was never quite the same as
28 Od. VIII, 169-173. S0 Isocr., XV, 166.
31
29 Eustath., Vit. Pind. 28. Fr. 9, 1-4.

264 C. M. BOWR1A.
other Greek cities and that the seventh century was not the
sixth. But the fact remains that it was possible for a Greek of
the seventh and sixth centuries to be far from being a democrat
or rebel and yet to disapprove of undue rewards being given to
athletes. Indeed Solon seems to have had some doubts on the
subject. For, when he arranged for the city to pay five hundred
drachmae to an Olympian victor,32it looks as if he were trying
to regularize and control an existing practise which had got out
of control. For, as Diogenes Laertius says,33 he thought that
" it was in bad taste to increase the rewards of these victors and
to ignore the exclusive claims of those who had fallen in battle."
A similar doubt seems to have been felt by Pythagoras, who was
certainly no democrat. He advised men to compete, but not to
win, at Olympia; for he thought that victors were not emaydE
and liable to 0o'vos because of their success.34 Something of
the same temper may be seen in his famous comparison of life
to the Olympic Games. For in that the class of men who cor-
respond to the athletes are those whom apXs Kal 37yeuovLaqt?eApoS,
qfcXoVELKLare SoToloaved KaTEXoVCanv.35 There was in fact a small
current of opinion which was hostile to the excessive honours
paid to athletes, and Xenophanes shared it. But this does not
mean that he was seriously criticising the aristocratic way of
life or really finding himself in conflict with it. The aristocratic
society was tolerant of diversity of opinions on this as on other
points.
We may perhaps come to a more just appreciation of what
Xenophanes said and meant if we consider the position which
the great Games held in his time. The sixth century both in-
herited a tradition of athletics and itself added considerably to
it. It seems to have maintained the attitude towards athletics
which Homer ascribes to Alcinous:
ov .Luvyap /jELiOV KAXEOavepos ZOpa KEV rjFLV,
v O0 Tt TroTCV re
pTe XEPpLEvKaL ftlv.3
and to have felt, as Tyrtaeus knew that men of his time felt,
that success in them was an apera as good in its way as any
s2 Plut., Sol. 23.

38I, 55, Trs. R. D. Hicks. 86 Iamblich.,Vit. Pyth. 58.
34
Porph., Vit. Pyth. 15. a8 Od. VIII, 147-8.

other. It displayed its belief by the foundation of three new

festivals, the Pythian, Isthmian and Nemean, which, if they
did not quite equal the Olympian in prestige, were certainly
regarded as next in importance to it. The great majority of
Greeks enjoyed the Games and admired men who succeeded in
them, and when Xenophanes attacked the honours paid to ath-
letes, he attacked a wide and popular belief, which was not con-
fined to a single class but held by most men of his time. So if
we would understand the reasons for his attack and the argu-
ments which he used, we must first understand the extraordinary
prestige which athletic success had for Greeks of all kinds and
places.
The plain fact seems to be that in many parts of Greece the
athletic victor was regarded not so much as a superior man but
as someone who was almost above man.37 It is significant that
Tyrtaeus compares him not to other men or even to heroes but
to the Cyclops and the North Wind,38 while " Theognis " com-
pares him also to the North Wind and to the Harpies.39 There
is of course some natural exaggeration in these comparisons, but
they indicate that those who admired athletic success saw in it
something more than mortal. And this admiration found its
expression in the honours paid to athletes, in songs composed
for their home-coming and in statues erected in their honour.
The great development of the Epinician in the sixth century
and the number of archaic statues of athletes made in it show
the degree of success which attended the victor. In Southern
Italy and Sicily respect for athletic success seems to have reached
its highest point; and, if Xenophanes was in the West when he
wrote these lines, he may well have been moved by the extraor-
dinary honours which the Western Greeks seem to have paid to
victors. For in the West the victor seems literally to have be-
come a hero. Philippus of Croton, who accompanied Dorieus
to Sicily and died fighting against Segesta, was heroized after
his death and honoured with sacrifices " because of his beauty." 40
But we may suspect that, since he was an 'OAXvurovtK-q, his ath-
letic prowess had something to do with the establishment of his
cult. Another man of the West, Euthymus of Epizephyrian
a8Cf. F. M. Cornfordin J. E. Harrison, Themis, pp. 212-259.
88Fr. 9, 3-4. 89 715-6. 40Hdt., V, 47.

266 C. M. BOWRA.
Locri, also an Olympic victor, is said to have received similar

honours in his own lifetime.41 No less significant is the story
that the famous athlete, Milon of Croton, led his country against
Sybaris dressed as Heracles with club and lion-skin.42 Heracles
was the true type of the KaAXkXtKo%, as Euripides shows in sev-
eral passages of his Hercules Furens 43 and as Pindar shows by
the many myths about Heracles which he inserted in his Epini-
cian Odes. His intimate connection with athletic success may
best be seen in the song attributed to Archilochus 44 which was
sung by the victor and his friends after the victory, with its
words:
TlvveXa
( KaXXtVtKE Xaip' ava$ 'Hpxce.
Milon must surely have indicated by dressing himself as Hera-

cles that he was in some sense like Heracles, a man more than
human because of his physical strength and prowess. He too
was a KaXXdvtKos, like the alleged patron and founder of the
Olympic Games. In beliefs of this kind we may see the first
stages of the remarkable honours paid to athletes which later
led to such a demonstration as that given to Exaenetus, who
won in 416 and 412 B. C. He entered his city in a four-horsed
chariot, attended by three hundred other chariots drawn by
pairs of horses.45
Nor were such demonstrations confined to the West. In other
parts of Greece the athletic victor was certainly regarded as
more than ordinary man. This may be seen clearly in the lines
which Simonides wrote for the boxer, Glaucus of Carystus:
ov8e SIoXv&vK?o0 /3,a
XEJpas aYvrevaLtT av evavTov LavT
o'S otapEove 'AXKi,uivas TEKOS.46
These have been explained away, but it is clear from Lucian,

who quotes them,47 that Simonides put Glaucus above Heracles
and Polydeuces. Nor was his choice of heroes accidental. Hera-
41 Plin., N. H. VII, 47.
42
Diod., XII, 9. 46 Diod., XIII, 82.
43 582, 681, 789, 961. 4FFr. 28, Diehl; cf. Greek Lyric Poetry, p. 325.
44 Fr. 120, Diehl. 47 Pro. Imag. 19.

cles and Polydeuces were patrons of the Games, and to be com-

pared with them in this way meant that Glaucus also was in
some sense more than human. More mysterious is the case of
Cleomedes of Astypalea, who was disqualified for killing his
opponent but on the instruction of the Delphic Oracle was wor-
shipped as "the last of the heroes."48 It looks as if the Asty-
paleans were determined to make the most of their local athlete,
even if he had been disqualified. Even statues of athletes were
credited with miraculous powers. That of Theagenes of Thasos
fell on an enemy; and, when it was thrown into the sea, Thasos
was visited with a failure of crops.49 So it was fished up, and
in Lucian's time it was said to cure fevers. Similar powers were
attributed to the statue of Polydamas of Scotussa at Olympia.60
These cases show that the belief in the supernatural qualities
of athletic victors was widely spread and that it took the form
of comparing them to real heroes.
The idolization of athletic victors was not confined to reli-
gious rites and beliefs in miraculous powers. There was also a
social and political side to it. Success in the Games was an
excellent means to winning popularity and power, and it is
significant that tyrants and would-be tyrants competed and won.
In the Olympic Games the facts speak for themselves. Myron,
successor of Orthagoras at Sicyon, won the chariot-race in 648
B. C. Pheidon of Argos, whom Aristotle regarded as a tyrant,51
seems to have tried to control the Games and certainly inter-
fered with them.52 Cylon, would-be tyrant of Athens, was an
'OXv,vp7rovtKt.53 In the sixth century Cleisthenes of Sicyon won
the chariot-race,54and among other successful competitors were
Peisistratus of Athens 55 and the elder Miltiades.56 And on the
negative side the evidence is no less illuminating. From Sparta,
where any attempt to establish tyranny was regarded with hos-
tile suspicion, no king competed until the rebellious Demaratus
won the chariot-race.57 In Athens such victories, common in
the days of the tyrants, were viewed with increasing distrust as
the fifth century advanced. In the collection of Pindar's Epini-
48 Paus., 83Id., VI, 71.
VI, 9, 6.
49Id., VI, 11. 5 Id., VI, 126.
0OLucian, Deor. Conc. 12. 56 Hdt., VI, 103.
"IPol. V, 8, 1310 b 26. 56Id., VI, 36.
7 Id.,
6{t;.9VI,
a Hdt., VI 127.
12. VI, 70.

268 C. M. BOWRA.
cian Odes only two were written for Athenians, Pythian VII in
486 B. C. for the ostracised Megacles, and Nemean II about the
same time for Timodemus of Acharnae, and the absence of later
examples shows what public opinion felt on the matter.58 The
distrust felt at Athens about such victories may be seen from
the way in which Thucydides makes Alcibiades defend his own
sensational entries in the chariot-race at Olympia and admit
candidly that such Aa/T7rporrl as his naturally excited 06ovos
among his fellow-citizens.59 Something of the same hostile
spirit may be seen in the lines on the great Rhodian athlete
Dorieus,60who won three times in the Olympic and eight times
in the Isthmian Games,61but took a leading part in anti-Athe-
nian politics and was exiled from Athens and Rhodes and con-
demned in absence to death.62 The epigram may be dated soon
after 424/3 B. C. and says of him:
7rptv JvyeCvye 7rarp'Sa

SeLva yE XELtpl7roAAapWEas zpya Kal /3tata.
No doubt his politics were oligarchic, as his father's seem to

have been before him,63 and he was regarded as a dangerous
member of society. The connection of games with politics was
particularly clear in the West, as the early years of the fifth
century show, when Astylus of Croton, Anaxilas of Rhegium,
Theron and Xenocrates of Acragas, Gelon and Hieron of Syra-
cuse all won important events. Nor was this interest simply a
development of the military tyrannies which flourished after
500 B. C. For at some date between 530 and 520 B. C. Pan-
tares of Gela, the father of the future tyrants Cleandrus and
Hippocrates, won the chariot-race,64and recorded the fact with
a dedication.65 In the West, as elsewhere, the prestige which
belonged to any successful athlete was eagerly sought by those
who wished to win political power for themselves and their
families.
Xenophanes, then, living in Sicily in the sixth century, would
68 Bacchylides, Ode X is also for an Athenian, but his name and its
date are not known.
59Thuc., VI, 16, 3.
60Anth. Pal. XIII, 11. 63 Cf.
Pind., 01. VII, 17, 90 ff.
61
Paus., VI, 7, 4. 6' Hdt., VII, 154.
62 65 Geffcken, No. 20.
Xen., Hell. I, 5, 19.

have had good reasons for deploring the respect paid to athletes
both on moral and on political grounds. In fact both objections
might be reduced in Greek language to the same, that such suc-
cess made a man think too highly of himself and believe that
he was not as other men. It was liable to encourage /3pts, and
that Xenophanes disapproved of /f3pt may be seen clearly from
his attack on the old inhabitants of Colophon who flaunted their
wealth before the crowd and were punished for it,66-a senti-
ment which agrees with some lines of Theognis where the con-
quest of Colophon is regarded as a classic case of the punish-
ment of v3pts.67 The undue respect for athletic success, of
which he speaks, seems to have been curbed to some extent in
the fifth century, and Pindar at least was careful not to praise
athletes too highly. But his very moderation, his insistence on
not wanting too much, are in themselves evidence for a widely
spread idolatry of athletes. Pindar was in his own way con-
scious both of the religious and political aspects of this worship.
He never once says that a successful athlete is really more than
man,68 and at times he warns his patrons against thinking that
they are. The clearest case are his words to Phylacides of
Aegina in Isthmian V, 14-16:
l7u /!aTreve Zevs yevat 7raOa r'
erdxr C
eL C '
TOVTWV
JtLOtp
o eLKOLTO Kax.wv.
OvarTaOvarolcrt 7rperel.
but a similar message may be seen for the father of Hippocleas

e Fr. 3, Diehl. 67 1103-4.
68 Certain passages of Pindar have been taken to convey that the
victor is more than man, but all may be satisfactorily explained other-
wise. They are:
a) 01. VI, 8-9 Zffrw yap ev TroIry ?res'Xy 8at.6vtov ir65' Xwv Zwaorpdrov
vios
where 5aq6'vtov means "by the help of the gods."
b) 01. IX, 28 dayaOol& Ka& l ar6
K KaT& a aliovp' &papos eyevovT'
where KarTa aillova does not mean "like a god" but "by god's will"
which makes men brave and wise.
c) 01. IX, 110 roPY*'cdvpa Baqt/ovpla ye'ydaev e'XeLpa KTX.
where 5atiuovia again means "by god's will."
d) Nem. I, 9 KeIPOVaib dfvpbs 8at.Loviats dpeTrai
where the 8atuo6vta dpe7ra are simply the successes which the victor
wins through the help of the gods.

270 C. M. BOWRA.
of Thessaly, who has the great joy of seeing his son a Pythian
victor, but must remember the limits set to human happiness
(Pyth. X, 27):
6 XaAKeo ovpavoY oV 7rOT' au/83a'ro avrT
while Aristophanes of Aegina is reminded that (Nem. III, 21)

OVKIKETTpoaTw
a/3frav aAa KLOVWV
VirEp 'HpaKAXosgTrepavev/apes.
Nor was Pindar unaware of the political implications of athletic

success. He approves of Diagoras of Rhodes because he
v/ptos eXOpav o8ov

vevropEd (01. VII, 91)
and in his praise of Hieron he is careful to point out that being

a king he must look for no more than that:
/LJKETLTratTaLve 7ropacov (01. I, 114)
while his myth of Tantalus is a solemn warning against any

attempt to escape from the mortal state. A similar warning
may be seen at the end of Pythian I, where Hieron is told that
he may choose between being like the good king Croesus or the
evil tyrant Phalaris, and we cannot doubt that Pindar was fully
conscious of the pride which athletic renown might breed in a
man.
Pindar shows that the attitude which Xenophanes seems to
attack still existed in his time and needed careful correction.
His attitude is based on a moral conviction of the wickedness of
vf/pts, and like him Xenophanes approaches the question in an
ethical spirit. He states his objections briefly and uses the lan-
guage of his time. His first point made at 13 is that it is not
8&KaLov to prefer strength to his own good aootoq. The word
8cKaLoshas as many meanings as the English "right," and we
cannot expect Xenophanes to have decided very exactly what
he meant by it. In general &'Katosseems to mean that which
belongs to the established order of things and is for that reason
to be approved. Its opposite, a&Kos3, is applied to whatever
breaks this order and is associated with Kdposand v/?Spt. This
way of thinking is to be seen in Solon's analysis of the political

situation in his time and it takes on a more tendencious air with

Theognis. Xenophanes seems to mean that the preference for
athletes is not " right" because it is against the established
order of things. He could, no doubt, have added that it en-
couraged Vi'ppLin those who were so honoured. He looks back
to a past when words were more honoured than athletic success,
and his language, though not specifically political, belongs to
an aristocratic order of society in which any far-reaching change
which seemed to promote the unworthy was regarded as JaKOv.
Xenophanes' second objection is given in 15-19, where he
denies that if men win in the Games,
TOWvEKxVav aS /UaioV vev evo1.rj 7ro6vL
eJIq.
The word Ecvoplr was often associated with 8tcKand is closely
connected with it. Hesiod made Eovou/l, AIKV, and Etipv
daughters of Themis,69 and Avvo/'Urq and 'Aad cdaughters of
Eris.70 This ancient view was accepted by Bacchylides, who at
XV, 54-55 calls /AKq
ayvas5
Evvopu'asaKo'oveov Kal T7rtvvwT ?e',uro5,
and echoed by Pindar at Olympian XIII, 6-9:

ev T. yap EvvoputavaltE Kaoryv7lTal T?e,/aOpov 7roAXwv
aua<aAs,
Aa Ka
a oLoporpOo Eip..va, .iaLL'avSpact 7rXOTrov,
XPvaeat 7rai8es ev,ovAov e/LrTOs.
In the fifth century Evvo,a and AlKa had come to be catch-

words of oligarchic and aristocratic societies, as we see from
Pindar 01. XIII, 6 of Corinth, IX, 16 of Opus, Pyth. V, 67 of
Cyrene, and Bacchylides, XIII, 186 of Aegina. In the sixth
century it does not seem to have developed so exact a meaning,
but stood for the abstract quality of good government. In this
sense Solon uses it in an important passage,71 in which he
adopts an idea from Hesiod and contrasts EVvouiqwith Avavouoin.
He says that Avcvo.ul brings all evils to a city, but Ev'vojpl puts
things right and stops fiZpms and an7l. Solon is developing in
his own way the doctrine expounded by Hesiod of the different
results of good and bad government, and his chief development
Il Theog. 902. 70Ibid. 230. 71 Fr. 3, 30-39.

272 C. M. BOWRA.
lies in his application of the old idea to individual citizens who

may produce good or ill according as they act rightly or wrongly.
For him Evvo/,u is practically a state of mind, or at least a
political condition produced by a state of mind. And it is
something like this to which Xenophanes must refer when he
says that athletic success does not put a city a&iXXov ev Ecvoucl.
He means that so far from creating that modest frame of mind
which is the essence of social stability, the honours paid to
athletes will encourage vi/pts.72
Finally, Xenophanes closes with a third point in the words:
ora,cKpOV8' av TL 7roAXt Xaptua yevoLr E7rt
L,
td rTt ac9OXewv VtKuwIIaao 7rap' ox0as
ov yap 7rtava 7ravra LuvXovs7rolO'.
This might be taken to mean that the rich prizes given to vic-
tors were a waste of public money and a useless expense. And
of course it does mean this. But it also means something more.
The phrase is not simply an ironical understatement. It appeals
to a general principle, that it is the duty of citizens to enrich
their city and that those who govern it should aim at securing
such enrichment. The idea is implicit in the passage already
quoted from Olympian XIII where Peace, the companion of
Evvo/tla and Alca is called ra'u av8pdma7rXov'rov.A more obvious
connection may be seen in a vivid document of the aristocratic
life, Homeric Hymn XXX, where at 11-12 evvo,urvis definitely
connected with wealth:
'
avrol OevvoFdtaL n 7rocv KaTa KaXXIyvvatKa
KoLpaveov(c, XoA,/o? 8e 7roXAvKa 7rAVTros 0T7rli.
This emphasis on the importance of wealth belongs to the aris-

tocratic age, and may be seen most clearly in the Theognidea.
The situation is nicely summed up in the couplet, 885-6:
Etprvrjq Kat 7rAoTros Xot 7ro'Xtv, iofpa cueT' aXXov
KO)UdgoqL * KCKOV 8 OViK CpafraL 7wroXlov.
But Xenophanes is probably using an older idea even than

72 The contrast between eivooi.l and /#PLS had been made by Homer,
Od. XVII, 487, about the gods
dvaOpirewv iS3pv 're Kcat et,voALn,ve<'opwvrTes.

this,-the notion of Hesiod that just government makes a land

rich and is rewarded by the prosperity of the people:
OdX0ovaov 8' .yaOo'tL 8taiL7rEpEs ou8' eTr' vrwv
VLo'ovTra, Kap7rov 8E cE'pEt

EiSwopoSapovpa. (Op. 236-7)
If he had this, or a similar passage, in mind, Xenophanes'
meaning is clear. He criticises the rewards given to athletes,
because they do not enrich the city, that is, they have not the
true sign of a just government in making the country pros-
perous, and are in fact aSlKa.
Xenophanes then seems to attack these rewards and honours
on traditional and conventional grounds which are in origin as
old as Hesiod and were current in the aristocratic society of
his own day. So far from advancing a revolutionary argument,
he appeals to deep-seated convictions which were too familiar
to need elaboration. A similar traditionalism may be seen in
the three types of reward which he chooses to make his meaning
clear. All three are privileges or possessions which belonged by
traditional right either to the hereditary ruling class or to a
few distinguished men who had done some benefit to the city.
Xenophanes does not distinguish between the two classes of
beneficiaries because his point is that athletes are neither but
get rewards which they do not deserve and to which they are
not properly entitled. The first appears in 7:
Kal KE T7pOesptlrV 4favep)v iv ayOtv apotro.
The privilege of 7rpoeSptgv,of sitting in the front seats at games

and festivals, was an ancient and prized honour. In the main
it was given to persons of high rank or to families and even to
cities as a reward for benefits rendered. So the Spartans tradi-
tionally allowed it to their kings 73 and gave it to the Deceleans
because of help given long ago to the Tyndarids.74 The Del-
phians gave it to their great benefactor Croesus,75and in Man-
drocles' picture of Darius at the Bosphorus the king was depicted
as sitting Ev TrpoESp.76 In the fifth century, at least in Athens,
it was granted more freely, and Aristophanes, who was a stickler
for old customs, complains of the common demand for it among
Athenian generals:
73 Hdt., VI, 57. 75 Id., I, 54.
74 Id., IX, 73. 76
Id., IV, 88.
2

274 C. M. BOWRA.
vvv 8' Eav L 'u 7rpoEoptav

p EpoXa Kal Ta acTa,
ov i.aXezOaaL
aacTv.77
Xenophanes would have agreed with Aristophanes that it was a

special privilege which should be given only to a select few.
The second privilege which Xenophanes mentions is that of
being fed at the public expense. This might possibly refer to
the feasting of Olympic victors in the 7rpvTaveaovat Olympia, to
which Pausanias refers,78but more probably it refers to the free
feasting granted to victorious athletes on their home-coming in
their own 7rpvraveoov. That such honours were given in the fifth
79
century is proved by an Attic inscription of B. C. c. 431-422
and by Socrates' words to his judges that if he must fix his own
sentence, it would be ev 7rpvravetW? CTeraLoLa,0 which he claimed
to deserve more than any Olympian victor. Such honours were
also granted at Carthaea in Ceos81and in Paros.82 Xenophanes
shows that they existed at least in the sixth century, and he
complains about them. His reasons for complaint may be seen.
Originally the privilege of feasting in the Prytaneum seems to
have been rather exclusive. The Pyrtaneum was regarded as the
common hearth of the city,83 and the custom of giving free
meals in it was derived from the entertainment dispensed by
kings to distinguished guests.84 So King Celeus, the founder
of Demeter's cult at Eleusis, asked important men to his table,
and this was called 7pvraveov.85 In the sixth century the right
of eating in the Prytaneum seems to have belonged to heredi-
tary aristocrats or to the benefactors of the city and their
descendants. At Athens it was where aristocrats met and sang
oaKoAa,86 while the descendants of Harmodius and Aristogeiton
had the right to feast in it.87 The antiquity of the privilege
may be seen from the fact that this right was also awarded to
the descendants of the Delphian Cleomantis, who was said to
have helped Athens in the time of King Codrus.88 In Mytilene
77 Equ. 575-6. 78 V, 15, 8.
791. G. I (ed. min.), 77. Cf. H. T. Wade-Gery in B. S. A., XXXIII,

pp. 123-127.
80
Apol. 36 d. 85Plut., Symp. Prob. IV, 4, 1.
81 I. G.
XII, 5, 1060. 86 Schol. Plat. Gorg. 415 e.
82Ibid. 274, 281, 289. 87 . G. I (ed. min.), 77.
83 Schol. 88
Thuc., II, 15. Lycurg., In Leocr. 87.
84 J.
Burnet, Plato's Apology, p. 155.

Sappho's brother, Larichus, served wine in the Prytaneum be-

cause he was yevy7v,89 and one of Alcaeus' objections to Pittacus
seems to have been that he, a man of low origin, held carouses
in it.90 Even in the fifth century at Tenedos Pindar's Nemean
XI, with its invocation of
lat 'Peasq, a Te Trpvraveta 'Eornua
XEAXoyXa%,
shows that it was still an exclusive place and that the admission
of the young Aristagoras to it was perhaps due to his being
descended from Orestes.91 An inscription of the sixth century
from Cyzicus grants arcXEctv Kal 7rpvraveov to the descendants
of two men who may be presumed to have been benefactors of
the city.92 So when Xenophanes objects to this privilege being
given to athletes, he again shows that in his view it was appro-
priate only to those who held it by ancient right or had really
done something for the city.
In objecting to the extension of the right of crtrTat Xeno-
phanes again recalls Solon. Two passages show that Solon
tried to control the practise and to regularise it. Plutarch (Sol.
24) says of him: Tov yap aCrov OVKea omricrOat roXXAoKts eLav S8
O JYV 7eEtraT 7rXEovEtav, TO 8e
( p
KaG7)K- 3ovAXrat, KOXLeEL
Ta
rcpoi/rtav Trv KoLvwv; and this makes it clear that, like Xenoph-
anes, he objected to the appearance of some men at the rr-mc-ts
as an exhibition of rXEAovela,while the penalty attached to the
non-appearance of the rightful participants was an attempt to
summon the nobles to a proper sense of their duty. Secondly,
Athenaeus (IV, 137 e) says that he ordered TroZ 'v ITpvTavet
aLTovltEVOLS in distinction from those who fed TaTs
Jaiiav 7rap'xetv
EopTrat and were to be given aprov. The explanation of this
distinction is to be found in a quotation from the IIrwxol of
Chionides made by Athenaeus on the point. It seems that a
feast was sometimes given to the Dioscuri in the Prytaneum;
they received
rvpov Kai fvanrrv spwverrecs r' Acaas Kalt rpdva
which were given by the Athenians VrLOvmv 7roLovJlevov T

apxatas a-yoyis. The distinction which Solon made shows that
89Schol. II. XX, 234. 91Nem. XI, 33-5.

90Cf. Greek Lyric Poetry, p. 157. 9a G. D. I. 5522.

276 C. M. BOWRA.
he wished to keep the ancient character of or47ots in the Pryt-

aneum and did not wish the custom to become simply a social
event. It is not clear that he appreciated the religious aspect
of it or regarded this as of primary importance. To judge by
Plutarch's words he saw the question as one that concerned the
city and the attitude of her citizens towards her customs. In
this he resembled Xenophanes.
The attitude of Solon and Xenophanes in regarding (IrT-cts
as a primarily civic right proper to good citizens was a protest
against another view which may have been equally ancient. If
the Dioscuri were regarded as being present at such a OEo4evta
we can better understand why athletes were given the privilege
of eating in the Prytaneum. For the Dioscuri were essentially
patrons of the Games. That is no doubt why Theron asked
Pindar to sing his Olympian III at a OEoE'vLa at which the
Dioscuri and Helen were thought to be present. So too in
Sparta oatrql7owas held in the presence of the same divine par-
ticipants.93 The victorious athlete was regarded as a proper
guest for such an occasion in that he had been specially favoured
by the Dioscuri. Pindar makes them the source of his glory,94
but perhaps in earlier days he was regarded as being somehow
more important than this, and himself half divine. Xenophanes
protests against too great attention being paid to the athlete,
and his reason is not religious but social or ethical. The undue
honours are disruptive of good order and against ancient
practise.
The third reward is given in the words at 9
Kat 8wpov o ol KELr AtOv de7
and since the language recalls the words in which Homer de-
scribes the gift offered by Telemachus to Athene 95 or the cup
given by Achilles to Nestor,96 it may be assumed to be some-
thing valuable, money or the like. Such rewards seem not to
have been common in early days, but it is significant that early
evidence for them comes from Sicily. Staters of Metapontum,
minted about B. C. 500 with the inscription 'Axewov aeOAov
seem to be prize-money,97and Evans well explains the Syra-
93 G. D. I. 4440-4442.
9" 01. III, 39. 9 II. XXIII, 618.
96 Od. I, 312. 97 Head, Hist. Numm., p. 63.

cusan decadrachms inscribed aOXaas rewards for a victory of

B. C. 412.98 Before either of these the custom of giving money
to Olympian victors is proved in Athens by Solon's limitation
of the reward to five hundred drachmae. Xenophanes com-
plains that the athlete does not deserve such a reward:
TavTra KE 7ravTa XaXOL
ovK JV a,,oS 'crTrep ey. (10-11)
and implies that while some men, like himself, deserve money,
others do not. In this he recalls both Solon and Theognis.
Solon made a distinction between just and unjust gain. His
unjust gain is sought in i8pt, comes ov Kara Ko'riov, and is
soon followed by aTr.99 In general his position may be seen
from the line: 100
7roXXot yap ,rXovrovcri KaKO&, ayaOol 8e 7rcvovTa&
which implies that money should belong not to KaKol but to

ayaOoi, and since in his time the words had a largely political
meaning, he suggests that money on the whole should belong
to those who have a right, by inheritance or " just gain," to it.
Theognis takes the point further when he complains that owing
to loss of their wealth the &aOXotare now KaKol101or that men
of good birth marry women of bad birth for their money and
/0letLe
TrXovTroS yTvog.102 He believes that the ayaJol ought to be
rich and the KaKol poor, and any deviation from this he con-
siders wrong. Xenophanes seems to have agreed with him to
the extent of thinking that some men deserved money while
others did not.
Xenophanes, then, uses arguments and makes points which
would appeal to Greek aristocrats of the sixth century like
Solon or Theognis, and the basis of his case against the rewards
given to athletes is that they are wrong because they upset the
existing order and confer honour on those who do not deserve
what should properly be given to the city's benefactors. Among
these benefactors he classes himself, and so he claims for him-
self a position which may strike us as unusual for a Greek poet.
Rich rewards do not seem commonly to have fallen to poets,
98
Num. Chron., 1891, p. 333.
99 Fr. 1, 9-13. 100 Fr. 4, 9. 101 53 ff. 102 183-192.

278 C. M. BOWRA.
though Arion's trip to the West shows that in the right circum-
stances they could make money.103But Xenophanes' claim is not
so much that he wants money as that he deserves it, and he
deserves it because his art does good to the city as the athlete's
success does not. He is in fact reasserting an old idea that
there was an apErrTof words just as there was of physical
strength or birth or martial prowess. The claim was as old as
Homer who made Odysseus contrast the ugly and eloquent man
with the beautiful and speechless.104 But it was developed by
the elegiac poets and seems to have been almost a traditional
subject for them. One poet would praise this type of apeTr,
and another that. So Tyrtaeus in Fr. 9 dismisses the dperatof
the athlete, the beautiful, the royal and the eloquent in favour
of the soldier who dies for his country. So too "Theognis,"
699-718, cynically prefers the aperr/ of wealth to the aperrT of
moderation, wits, eloquence, and speed. These two poems show
that among other JpeTra those of words and wisdom had a place,
and no doubt Xenophanes felt that he was qualified to compete
under both headings. To suit this traditional type of com-
parison he used the elegiac, as Tyrtaeus and " Theognis " used
it, but he came to a different conclusion from either of them.
The presence of poetry, or at least of eloquence, in the other
lists shows that it was regarded as a possible claimant to having
the best type of aperqr,and Xenophanes may not have shocked
or surprised his audience when he entered a plea for it.
By saying that athletic success does no good to the city and
claiming that his own art is better than it, Xenophanes hints
that he somehow benefits the city. So he makes a claim which
was more than a century later to be elaborated by Aristophanes
in his Frogs. There at 1009-1010 even Euripides is allowed to
say that poets make " men better in cities " and Aeschylus
claims that his Persians made men fight better (1026-7), that
the great poets of the past had all been teachers, (1030-36),
that poets do for grown men what school teachers do for boys
(1054-5). Xenophanes can hardly be regarded as teaching
ra,et, apETa, orXAIcreIsavSpiv with Homer, but he certainly
thought that he was a teacher, and it must be for this that he
claimed a reward. The teaching which he claimed for his own
103 104 Od. VIII, 169-175.
Hdt., I, 24.

must have been the remarkable physical and theological specu-

lations whose remains are to be seen in his Hexameters, and
this elegiac poem is a personal appeal to men to look more
seriously at his more serious works. Just as Heraclitus tells
men to listen to his Xoyos,105 or Solon prefaces his political
warning with the words
Tavra LsataL Ov,IUos'A07rvatovs JLL
K/eAevEt,1?
so Xenophanes claims to be heard because he has something to

say that will benefit the city. Nor, if we may judge by a later
age, was Xenophanes alone in claiming civic rewards for a poet.
For Aristophanes complained of the public neglect of old
Cratinus
ov Xpvv vtKas 7rtlVCV v
Sta Tas 7rporepas 7rpvTavetw.
(Knights 535)
and makes a very similar point not for himself but for someone
whose poetry he admired.
In conclusion, then, we may say that this poem affords no
evidence that Xenophanes was a revolutionary in any political
sense. It shows that he attached a high importance to his own
work, that he disapproved of honours given to men whom he
thought unworthy, that, like Tyrtaeus and Solon, he judged the
worth of an activity by its use to the city. He presents his case
in traditional language and appeals to the deep distrust which
the Greeks felt for vippiLor disturbance of the existing order.
In his moral judgments he was certainly more sensitive and
severe than many men of his time, but he was not so destructive
or so revolutionary in them as he was in his theology. He was
a high-minded member of a society which was conscious of its
social and moral obligations. In the sixth century Greek aris-
tocrats were neither all so reactionary as Alcaeus nor so homo-
geneous in their opinions as some social historians have thought,
and the intellectual vigour and range of a class which produced
Pythagoras and Heraclitus found a characteristic voice in
Xenophanes.
C. M. BowRA.
WADHAM COLLEGE,
OXFORD.
106 Fr. 1. o06Fr. 3, 30.


BOWRA. Xenophanes and The Olympic Games

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BOWRA. Xenophanes and The Olympic Games

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Xenophanes and the Olympic Games

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

VOL. LIX, 3 WHOLENo. 235

XENOPHANES AND THE OLYMPIC GAMES.

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

The interpretation of these lines depends on the meaning given

Fr. 2, Kinkel. 11 Fr. 1, 52, Diehl.

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

many things and an art of mischief" (Burnet). Since Hera-

15 Fr. 1. 18Fr. 21 b, Diels.

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

its own way as an example of TcXVf. " Good " is so ambiguous

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

told, and after saying that, he would have found it difficult to

Rhapsodes were certainly in a different position and may well

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

aXos e?v y?ap (LOOS aJK8VO'TEpo T7rEXCavv7p,

Tp7ropoLevot XEcvcovclv, o 8' a'(LaXE'o ayopevr1

Xenophanes feels that the man of words should be honoured by

ovr av fJlvraarLfv ovT' ev Ao)y aWvpa

and he justified his preference by the usefulness of good fighters

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

s2 Plut., Sol. 23.

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

other. It displayed its belief by the foundation of three new

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

Locri, also an Olympic victor, is said to have received similar

Milon must surely have indicated by dressing himself as Hera-

These have been explained away, but it is clear from Lucian,

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

cles and Polydeuces were patrons of the Games, and to be com-

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

7rptv JvyeCvye 7rarp'Sa

No doubt his politics were oligarchic, as his father's seem to

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

but a similar message may be seen for the father of Hippocleas

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

while Aristophanes of Aegina is reminded that (Nem. III, 21)

Nor was Pindar unaware of the political implications of athletic

v/ptos eXOpav o8ov

and in his praise of Hieron he is careful to point out that being

while his myth of Tantalus is a solemn warning against any

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

situation in his time and it takes on a more tendencious air with

and echoed by Pindar at Olympian XIII, 6-9:

In the fifth century Evvo,a and AlKa had come to be catch-

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

lies in his application of the old idea to individual citizens who

KoLpaveov(c, XoA,/o? 8e 7roXAvKa 7rAVTros 0T7rli.

This emphasis on the importance of wealth belongs to the aris-

But Xenophanes is probably using an older idea even than

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

this,-the notion of Hesiod that just government makes a land

VLo'ovTra, Kap7rov 8E cE'pEt

The privilege of 7rpoeSptgv,of sitting in the front seats at games

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

vvv 8' Eav L 'u 7rpoEoptav

Xenophanes would have agreed with Aristophanes that it was a

791. G. I (ed. min.), 77. Cf. H. T. Wade-Gery in B. S. A., XXXIII,

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:02:40 PM

Sappho's brother, Larichus, served wine in the Prytaneum be-

which were given by the Athenians VrLOvmv 7roLovJlevov T